Lin v Homestead Bay Contracting Inc.

Key Facts

• Plaintiff, Tingkun (Roger) Lin, claimed $43,083.70 for services under an alleged verbal consulting agreement with the defendant, which included tasks like financial management, human resources, and administrative work.
• Defendant, Homestead Bay Contracting Inc. (HBCI) disputed the existence of a consulting agreement, claiming their relationship stemmed from renovation work on the plaintiff’s son’s property, with plaintiff performing only minor clerical tasks.

Disputes

1. Existence of an Agreement:
   • Plaintiff asserted a verbal consulting contract.
   • Defendant denied this, arguing tasks were informal and clerical, valued at approximately $2,800.
2. Credibility of Evidence:
   • Plaintiff’s invoices and work summary were questioned for credibility.
   • Defendant’s rejection of the plaintiff’s proposed consulting contract and profit-sharing terms fueled the dispute.

Court’s Analysis

• Relied on principles from Hryniak v. Mauldin and subsequent New Brunswick precedents on summary judgment.
• Determined that credibility issues and conflicting accounts created a genuine issue requiring trial.
• Rejected the option of a mini-trial, noting inefficiency given the scope of issues.

Decision

• The motion for summary judgment was dismissed.
• The court awarded costs of $1,500 to the defendant.